The statistics are horrifyingly real. From 2001 to 2012, the number of women murdered by intimate partners using guns (6,410) exceeded the number of U.S. troops killed in action in the Iraq and Afghan wars combined. Every day in our country, five women are murdered by gunfire. Even the most ardent gun-rights advocates should be appalled by this home grown carnage involving women. As far as intimacy and violence are concerned, our guns are not securing us. They are killing us at home and in our neighborhoods.

In its recent study, "Women Under the Gun," The Center for American Progress sets out the facts explaining how anemic gun laws at both the federal and state levels are allowing women to be killed. First, violence against women is generally a crime of intimacy. In 65 percent of cases, women knew their attackers. Men knew their assailants only 34 percent of the time.

Second, according to the study, a staggering proportion of violence against women is fatal, and guns are a key factor in those deaths. As the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence recognizes, if an abuser owns a firearm, an abused woman is five times more likely to be killed. (Domestic Violence & Firearm Policy Summary at smartgunlaws.org.)

Put simply, the presence of guns dramatically increases the probability of death in incidents involving domestic violence. In 2011 almost two-thirds of women killed with guns were killed by their intimate partners.

Jackson County prosecutors on Tuesday charged a 22-year-old Kansas City man with assault in connection with the accidental shooting of a 4-year-old boy on Monday in the 6000 block of Blue Hills Road.

According to court records:

Before the shooting, a woman allegedly took the gun away from her boyfriend because she feared he was going to “do something stupid.”

She allegedly handed the gun to Delaney R. Singleton, who was visiting the apartment. Later, as he handled the gun, it fired. A bullet crashed through a bathroom door into a bedroom and struck a 4-year-old boy in the lower back near his spine. The boy began yelling and crying.

Asked what happen, Singleton allegedly told witnesses, “I don’t know. It fell on the floor and went off.”

Later, when talking to detectives, Singleton said that he had been trying to “clear the gun” when it went off.

The analysis,
performed by Michael Bloomberg's gun violence prevention group,
Everytown for Gun Safety, looked at mass shootings that took place
between January 2009 and July 2014. In that span of five and a half
years, the group identified 110 mass shootings, which were defined as
shootings in which at least four people were murdered with a firearm. Of
those shootings, at least 57 percent were related to domestic or family
violence.

Kim Gandy, president of the National Network to End
Domestic Violence, said the report serves as sobering evidence for the
need to improve gun laws.

"It’s clear that many of these murders
were committed by people already barred from gun ownership by federal
law -- but that law is full of loopholes, like background checks not
being required for private sales, like Craigslist or at gun shows," she
said. "It’s shocking that the gun lobby has succeeded in blocking such
common-sense solutions, and that there aren’t more members of Congress
standing up on the issue."

Under
federal law, individuals who have been convicted of a misdemeanor
domestic violence offense or who are subject to a permanent domestic
violence restraining order can’t legally buy or possess firearms. But
many guns are purchased without a background check, making thorough enforcement of current laws all but impossible.

In addition, federal gun prohibitions only apply to
situations where the perpetrator is married to the victim, or cohabited
with or has a child with him. Dating partners and convicted stalkers
are not included, and those loopholes allow many domestic abusers to dodge the background check system.

According
to the Everytown analysis, in one-quarter of the mass shootings in
which the perpetrator killed a former or current partner, the
perpetrator would not have been barred from owning a firearm.

Walmart could be the next battleground in the fight over gun rights
in retail chains after a loaded revolver was found in the bathroom of a
South Carolina store.

On the afternoon of Saturday, July 12, a man
with a concealed carry permit left his gray Smith & Wesson
revolver, loaded with five live .38 caliber rounds, atop the toilet
paper dispenser in a stall of the rear men's bathroom of a York, South
Carolina Walmart, according to a police report.

The gun was returned to its owner on Monday, York police Captain Brian Trail told The Huffington Post.

The critics and the people have spoken, and “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes” is a bona fide summer success.

The sequel to the 2011 James Franco reboot “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” is a stunning achievement for motion capture acting and definitely an action-heavy blockbuster, but much of the buzz surrounding the film has largely centered around how refreshingly profound and thoughtful it is — particularly on the issue of violence. Gun violence, to be exact. “You’ll hear instances where actors have said, ‘I won’t appear in a movie poster with guns,’ or directors will say, ‘I will never put a gun in my movie,’ but there certainly aren’t many examples where [blockbusters] tackle this head on,” Dan Gross, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, told MTV News over the phone. “In this case, it very compellingly shows that before the gun was introduced, a fight was a fight. And now, when a gun is introduced, it has a much greater chance at turning lethal.”

"The Second Amendment is not for hunting, it's not even for self-defense," Pratt explained in his Leadership Institute talk. Rather, it is "for restraining tyrannical tendencies in government. . .Especially those in the liberal, tyrannical end of the spectrum. There is some restraint, and even if the voters of Brooklyn don't hold them back, it may be there are other ways that their impulses are somewhat restrained. That's the whole idea of the Second Amendment." He reiterated the point this March during an interview with conservative talk show host Bill Cunningham. Speaking of a New York Congresswoman who had expressed fear that one of Pratt's members wanted to shoot her, Pratt said, "You know, I'm kind of glad that's in the back of their minds. Hopefully they'll behave."

And if they don't? When speaking before smaller, conservative audiences, Pratt explains that it is necessary to both generate an undercurrent of fear and muster the organization and will to defeat the dictator prophesized in the Book of Samuel. When asked during a 2010 Q&A session, "Do we have the will to stand up to the government when they trample our rights?" Pratt replied, "That is an exceptionally important point to raise. We can have all the guns in the world, and if we don't have the will to use them [against the government], then they are useless."

In the past, if someone knew nothing and talked nonsense, no one paid
any attention to him. No more. Now such people are courted and flattered
by conservative politicians and ideologues as “Real Americans”
defending their country against big government and educated liberal
elites. The press interviews them and reports their opinions seriously
without pointing out the imbecility of what they believe. The hucksters,
who manipulate them for the powerful financial interests, know that
they can be made to believe anything, because, to the ignorant and the
bigoted, lies always sound better than truth.

Local news reports27 year-old Shaneen Allen wanted to protect her family. She took a gun safety course, applied for and was granted a concealed carry permit and she purchased a gun.

“One of my family members, he thought it was appropriate for me to get one because I’m a single mother and I have two children and I work two jobs and I work late and getting up at that time of night I got robbed twice last year and he felt the need for me to get my license to protect me and my kids,” Allen explained.

However, while Allen, from Philadelphia, was covered to carry a gun in Pennsylvania, she made the mistake of crossing into New Jersey with the weapon and now she's facing a mandatory minimum of three-years in jail.

Allen said that she didn't know her permit didn't apply to New Jersey so when she was stopped for a minor traffic offense she told the police about her gun and her permit to carry. In this case, being honest may have cost her.

“The judge tried to tell me that telling the truth messed me up, my life up and the cop said the same thing. Me opening my mouth and speaking out he said I’m one out of ten people that spoke up and was honest and that got me in trouble,” she said.

"she made the mistake of crossing into New Jersey with the weapon," but that wasn't her real mistake. Her real mistake was to ignore the law and figure she wouldn't get caught. Her second mistake was to pretend she was ignorant of the law, something that is hardly credible.

"I’m one out of ten people that spoke up and was honest and that got me in trouble.” What a crock. Typical of gun owners who think they can get away with disobeying "bad laws," she's blaming anything but herself. If she were truly innocent and truly law-abiding she would simply admit that she should have known better. Instead her story is a bizarre attempt at crying ignorance and selling herself as a single mom, an honest gun owner, a poor victim of overly strict NJ laws.

In spite of my total lack of sympathy for the tricky Ms. Allen, I don't think for a moment she deserves to go to jail, nor do I think she will. The gun rights fanatics come up with a case like this every year or two and try their best to make these people into poster-child heroes for gun rights. It's nonsense.

What should happen is someone who breaks these laws should lose their right to own and use guns. People who feel they can get away with breaking laws like this, are in the habit of breaking other laws they disagree with or find too inconvenient to obey. Or, giving them the benefit of the doubt and accepting their ignorance story, they are too stupid to even know what laws they need to follow, which makes it impossible for them to be law-abiding.

Conservative groups protested the possible housing of Central American children in Vassar, Michigan, on Monday by marching through town, some with AR-15 rifles and handguns, according to The Detroit News.

About 50 protesters led by the group Michiganders for Immigration Control and Enforcement carried American and “Don’t Tread on Me” flags as they marched from city hall to a social services facility that may house the children. The protest follows a similar but larger gathering that took place last week.

Three armed men wearing masks kicked
in the door of the 71-year-old man's house in Sharon, 75 miles northwest
of Pittsburgh, at around 12:30 a.m. Wednesday and took firearms
including an AK-47, handguns, rifles, shotguns, other semi-automatic
weapons, ammunition and historic pistols, police chief Michael Menster
said Thursday.

The
robbers tied the gun collector up, ransacked his house and locked him in
a closet. They also stole a television and stereo. When they left, the
man was able to escape and call 911, Menster said.

So much for the old "I don't dial 911"--you do, but only when it's too late.

Although, I did catch couple of comments in passing which I have to address as they bear on the "reality challenged right" title.

Something along the line of "Laci is going to get into a credentials checking mode", which I think was coupled with something along the line of "ad hominem". This shows the "reality challenged right" characteristic in full force for not understanding the term "ad hominem"--which is attacking the person in a debate rather than the substance of their argument. In other words, it is dodging that the person making the argument has some grasp of the topic and is making good points.

So, instead of saying that something is a misquotation, misinterpretation, or some other substantive point, one says "you're anti-gun" or "you're a liberal" to dismiss the argument (which is different from saying you're gun loons because of your lack of logic or critical thinking skills when it comes to this topic: insults are different from ad hominems).

That said, some expertise is a good thing. You wouldn't want a barber being a surgeon (at least not these days) or me telling you how to fix your car. In short, you wouldn't want someone who has no idea of what they are talking about, no matter how impressive they may sound, giving you advice on a topic. Although, this gets to the logic, critical thinking skills, and "reality challenged right" since you will make a comment that I have no idea of what I am talking about despite the fact that I pretty much supply my sources, which you could check: if you weren't adverse.

So, if I am not engaging with you it's not out of a sense of superiority or snobbishness as much as it is that I have a hard time dealing with stupid.

I am also not your teacher: especially since you have shown you are not willing to learn.

And some of you are obviously stupid.

Definitely ignorant. Remember ignorance isn't based upon your level of intelligence as much as it is based upon knowledge and how you are able to use that knowledge.

And you definitely have shown you aren't able to think coherently in this issue.

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon vetoed legislation Monday that would have
allowed specially trained teachers to carry concealed guns, asserting
that the move could jeopardize student safety in public schools.The
veto by the Democratic governor sets up a potential showdown with the
Republican-led Legislature, which could override Nixon if it gets a
two-thirds vote of both chambers during a September session.Nixon announced the veto with a written statement on the deadline day for him to take action on bills passed earlier this year."Arming
teachers will not make our schools safer," he said. "I have supported
and will continue to support the use of duly authorized law enforcement
officers employed as school resource officers, but I cannot condone
putting firearms in the hands of educators who should be focused on
teaching our kids."

While that sort of thing will annoy the gun loon crowd who want people to believe that walking around with weapons is somehow "normal" in a civilised nation (or is the message that the people in the US are savages or barbarians?), Archie will die saving the first openly gay character in the series, Kevin Keller.

"The way in which Archie dies is everything that you would expect of Archie," Archie Comics publisher and co-CEO Jon Goldwater said in a statement. "He dies heroically. He dies selflessly. He dies in the manner that epitomizes not only the best of Riverdale, but the best of all of us. It's what Archie has come to represent over the past almost 75 years."

"We wanted to do something that was impactful that would really resonate with the world and bring home just how important Archie is to everyone," Goldwater continues. "That's how we came up with the storyline of saving Kevin. He could have saved Betty. He could have saved Veronica. We get that, but metaphorically, by saving Kevin, a new Riverdale is born."

Well, I am sure this will definitely make an impact on the reality challenged right wing. I'm sure we can expect the usual bullshit from them.

A retired Florida police officer charged with murder in the shooting death of a fellow moviegoer during a dispute over texting was released from jail on bond Friday, his lawyer said.

Bail was set at $150,000 for Curtis Reeves, 71, who has been in jail without bond since the January shooting at a Tampa-area movie theater. A judge ordered Reeves under house arrest, and he is only to leave home to shop for groceries, seek medical care, or attend religious services.

"Mr. Reeves did nothing but use the law of self-defense in order to preserve his own life," his lawyer, Richard Escobar, told reporters. "He's coming home in order to resume his life and to assist us in preparing his defense."

As a condition of his bond, Reeves must surrender any personal firearms.

The spirit of National Socialism was one of
manliness, and individual self-defense and self- reliance
were central to the National Socialist view of the way a
citizen should behave. The notion of banning firearms
ownership was utterly alien to National Socialism. In the
German universities, where National Socialism gained its
earliest footholds and which later became its strongest
bastions, dueling was an accepted practice. Although the
liberal-Jewish governments in Germany after the First
World War attempted to ban dueling, it persisted
illegally until it was again legalized by the National
Socialists. Fencing, target shooting, and other martial
arts were immensely popular in Germany, and the National
Socialists encouraged young Germans to become proficient
in these activities, believing that they were important
for the development of a man's character.

A recent survey of gun dealers on illegal transactions yields new information on how criminals obtain guns.

Conducted by Garen J. Wintemute, a renowned gun researcher , public health expert and professor of emergency medicine at the School of Medicine at the University of California at Davis, thesurvey canvassed 1,601 federally licensed dealers and pawnbrokers in 43 states on how often attempts were made to acquire guns illegally and how sellers reacted to such attempts. Before the survey, there were almost no answers to those questions.Among the findings, 67 percent of sellers had experienced at least one attempted straw purchase in the year before the survey, for an estimated 2,051 attempts, while 43 percent had experienced at least one attempted undocumented purchase. Extrapolated to nearly 10,000 similar sellers nationwide, that works out to 33,800 attempted straw purchases a year, and 37,000 attempted undocumented purchases. Firearm theft was also common.

The respondents said they refused the sales when they detected illegal purchase attempts, but most did not subsequently alert law enforcement or other retailers.

The survey also asked the dealers and pawnbrokers for their opinion of the prevalence of other retailers’ knowing participation in illegal sales. The median estimate was 3 percent. Extrapolating to roughly 57,000 retail licensees in the United States as of mid-2012, that’s an estimated 1,719 dealers and pawnbrokers nationwide selling firearms illegally.

Asked what motivated gun retailers to sell guns illegally, the number one reason was “he wants the extra income,” followed by “he thinks there is little risk of being caught and prosecuted,” and “he is supplying guns to a specific criminal group or extremist organization.”

Massachusetts House lawmakers approved a sweeping bill Wednesday designed to tighten the state's gun laws. The bill, which passed on a 112-38 vote, would strengthen local police chiefs' discretion over issuing firearms identification cards needed for the purchase of rifles or shotguns, much like the discretion they currently have over issuing licenses to carry concealed weapons. The bill would require police chiefs to give written reasons for denying gun licenses, however. Their decisions would have to be based on public safety and could be appealed in court.
In opening remarks on the bill, Public Safety Committee Co-chairman Rep. Harold Naughton, D-Clinton, predicted its passage would “make the streets of this Commonwealth safer and will protect the rights of our lawful gun owners.”

In Nazi Germany, the penalties for abortion were
increased. In 1943, providing an abortion to an "Aryan" woman became a
capital offense. Abortion was only permitted if the foetus was deformed
or disabled in accordance with Nazi eugenics policies.

The Nazi mother's cross award

A case in point, Marie-Louise Giraud (17 November 1903 - 30 July1943) was a housewife
and mother who became one of the last women to be guillotined in France.
Giraud was a convicted abortionist in 1940s Nazi occupied France. She
was executed on 30 July 1943 for having performed 27 abortions in the
Cherbourg area.

In fact, the Nazi execution of abortion
providers seems to fall in with radical pro-lifers extra-judically
killing abortion providers.

Quite frankly the Nazis had
very firm ideas about the role of women in Germany. Hitler thought that
the population of Germany had to increase for the country to become
more powerful. Therefore women were forced to give up work and have
children.

On 5th July 1933 the Law for the
Encouragement of Marriage was passed. This act gave all newly wed
couples a loan of 1000 marks which was reduced by 25% for each child
they had. If the couple went on to have four children the loan was wiped
out.

Girls were taught at school that women had to
have children and look after their husbands. They were told not to smoke
or diet as it could affect their ability to have healthy children.

Unmarried
women were also encouraged to have children and for those without a
husband they could visit the local Lebensborn where they could be made
pregnant by a racially pure member of the SS.

Quite frankly, anyone who is not historically ignorant should be afraid of where the US right is has been going.

See:

Ferree, Myra Marx (2002). Shaping abortion discourse: democracy and the public sphere in Germany and the United States. Cambridge University Press.